Highlights of the Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators

The proposed framework of inclusive growth indicators identifies policy ingredients of inclusive growtheconomic growth and employment opportunities, social inclusion, social protection, as well as good governance and institutions, on which it is based. The inclusive growth indicators is a set of 35 indicators of (i) poverty and inequality (income and nonincome), (ii) economic growth and employment, (iii) key infrastructure endowments, (iv) access to education and health, (v) access to basic infrastructure utilities and services, (vi) gender equality and opportunity, (vii) social safety nets, and (viii) good governance and institutions. Key points that emerge from available data for the 35 indicators are presented below.

Poverty and Inequality Income Poverty

Poverty, whether measured by countries own

criteria or by a standard definition such as $1.25 or $2 a day, has declined in most countries of the Asia and the Pacific region due to high rates of growth in gross domestic product over the last two decades. Poverty is much more widespread in rural than in

urban areas. Between the earliest and latest periods for which data are available, the ruralurban disparities as measured by ratio of rural poverty to urban poverty worsened in almost all countries in the region, except for Afghanistan, India, and Sri Lanka. Between the earliest and latest periods for which

data are available, the ratios of share of income/ consumption of the richest 20% to the bottom 20% increased in 12 out of 22 countries, although, overall poverty declined in most of them.

Nonincome Poverty
Wide disparities exist across countries in the

percentage of children under 5 years of age who are judged to be underweight. These range from 40% and more in Bangladesh, India, and Timor-Leste, to under 2% in Georgia, Samoa, and Tuvalu. Children in rural households are much more likely

to be underweight than those in urban areas, and the children in the poorest households are more likely to be underweight than those from the top quintile. As seen with underweight prevalence, overall,

children in the poorest 20% of households are at higher risk of death than those in the richest 20%, with at least three times higher risk in Cambodia,

India, the Philippines, Samoa, and Viet Nam.

Policy Pillar 1: High, Efficient, and Sustained Growth to Create Productive Jobs and Economic Opportunity

Economic Growth and Employment

Average per capita incomes grew faster during

20002009 compared to incomes during 1990 2000. The growth of employment has, however, not kept pace with economic growth as revealed by the employment elasticity for most countries. A large workforce comprises own-account and

contributing family workers, also termed as vulnerable employment, compared to more stable wage-paid employees. More women are employed in vulnerable jobs compared to men in most countries. Growth in mean per capita incomes (or consumption)

measured in 2005 purchasing power parity based on household surveys for 19 economies shows that for eight economies, the average annual growth in the mean per capita income (or consumption) was faster for the lowest quintile compared to the total population, while for rest of the economies, the

mean incomes of the lowest quintile grew much slower than those of the total populations. Key Infrastructure Endowments Availability of per capita electricity, mobile phones,

and paved roads, including access to financial institutions, has been improving, but there are large disparities across countries.

Policy Pillar 2: Social Inclusion to Ensure Equal Access to Economic Opportunity Access and Inputs to Education and Health
Between 1999 (or nearest year) and 2009, school

life expectancies rose in all countries except for the Marshall Islands and Samoa. The gap between girls and boys in the number of years of schooling has narrowed in most countries. In countries with low rates of immunization for

children, children in rural areas and those from the poorest 20% of households were clearly at a disadvantage. In most economies, governments spend little on

health (about 4%10% of overall government expenditures). In contrast, the advanced economies of Australia, Japan, and New Zealand spend about 15%22% on health against overall expenditures. 3

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Special Supplement

Introduction
Developing economies in the Asia and Pacific region have made significant strides in reducing extreme poverty in the last 2 decades. While the region has achieved high economic growth rates in recent years and remarkable success in reducing extreme poverty, most economies still face the challenges of hunger, undernourishment, child mortality, low achievements in primary education, and other nonincome dimensions of development. In many economies, inequalities pertaining to income and nonincome outcomes between different groups of populations, especially between the rich, the poor, and the vulnerable sections, have been widening. In addition, the severe economic shock of 20082009 and rising food prices in many countries affected the most vulnerable populations in the developing economies. This has heightened the need for strong and sustainable growth and creation of opportunities leading to inclusive growth so that benefits can be shared by all. Some studies (Ali and Zhuang 2007, ADB 2011, Commission on Growth and Development 2008) advocate growth strategies that favor equality of opportunities so that everyone can participate in and benefit from the growth process. This special supplement to the Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 proposes

a framework of inclusive growth indicators and presents statistics on the proposed set of indicators for the developing member economies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). It is a continuation of ADBs efforts to promote further research and measurement to operationalize inclusive growth.

Why must growth be inclusive?

Inclusive growth is important for very salient reasons: For ethical considerations of equity and fairness,

growth must be shared and should be inclusive across different segments of populations and regions. Economic and other shocks hurt the poor and the vulnerable most, and growth that results in high disparity is unacceptable. Growth with persisting inequalities within a

country may endanger social peace, force poor and unemployed people into criminal activities, make women more vulnerable to prostitution, force children into undesirable labor, and further weaken other disadvantaged and vulnerable sections of populationresulting in a waste of vast human capital that could otherwise be used productively in creating economic outputs for sustainable growth. Continued inequalities in outcomes and access to

opportunities in a country may result in civil unrest

and violent backlash from people who are continually deprived, derailing a sustainable growth process. This may create political unrest and disrupt the social fabric and national integration, undermining the potential for long-term, sustained growth. In the context of the debate on inequalities and strategies for inclusive growth, researchers have made a distinction between two types of inequalities: good inequalities and bad inequalities (Chaudhuri and Ravallion 2007). Good inequalities arise largely from differences in individual efforts, while bad inequalities arise from differences in circumstances beyond the control of individuals and prevent equal access to opportunities. It is the unequal access to opportunity that must form a nonnegotiable target of policy interventions toward inclusive growth. Creating equal access to opportunity should be at the core of inclusive growth as it aims to eliminate circumstance-related bad inequality. Accordingly, inclusive growth can be defined as economic growth with equality of opportunity. Therefore, Inclusive growth is about raising the pace of growth and enlarging the size of the economy, while leveling the playing field for investment and increasing productive employment opportunities, as well as ensuring fair access to them. It allows every section of the society to participate in and contribute to the growth process equally, irrespective of their circumstances. (ADB 2011, 47).

Policy Ingredients of an Inclusive Growth Strategy

In 2008, ADB adopted inclusive economic growth as one of its three critical strategic agendas1 in Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank, which will contribute to achieving ADBs vision of an Asia and Pacific region free of poverty and its mission to help reduce poverty and improve living conditions and the quality of life (ADB 2008, 1). Under Strategy 2020, ADB will support inclusive growth in the region through financing, policy advice and knowledge solutions, and technical assistance and capacity building, with particular foci on building infrastructure, providing basic public services such as water and sanitation and education, developing the financial sector and fostering financial inclusion, and enhancing food security. The concept of inclusive growth in ADBs Strategy 2020economic growth with equality of opportunity was developed by ADB staff and documented in detail in Ali and Zhuang (2007) and Zhuang (2010). The following three policy pillars supported by good governance and institutions (Zhuang 2010) are identified as requirements for a strategy anchored on inclusive growth that aims at high and sustained growth while ensuring that all members of the society benefit

from growth. 1 The other two are environmentally sustaina

High, efficient, and sustained growth to create

productive jobs and economic opportunity. High,

efficient, and sustained economic growth creates sufficient levels of productive jobs and expands economic opportunities for all. For developing Asia, it is imperative that economic growth also creates productive employment opportunities to absorb a large surplus labor force in decent jobs. High and sustained growth is a necessarythough not sufficientcondition for inclusive growth. It creates resources for governments to invest in better access to education and health services, infrastructure, social protection and safety nets for the poor and the vulnerable, and protection against transitory livelihood shocks. These are essential to achieve equality of opportunities through the other two policy pillars of inclusive growth.

Social inclusion to ensure equal access to

economic opportunity. Social inclusion ensures

that all sections of the population, including those disadvantaged due to their individual circumstances,

have equal opportunities. In the early stages of growth, inequalities are likely to rise as new opportunities are captured by people who are better placed to take advantage of them due to their initial situations. To ensure equal access to opportunities, human capacities should be enhanced to bridge the gaps that arise due to circumstances beyond the control of individuals, especially those from marginalized and disadvantaged sections of the society, including women. Thus, providing access to education, basic health facilities to all, and infrastructure to facilitate access to these services are essential ingredients of an inclusive growth strategy. Social safety nets. Social safety nets are required

to protect the chronically poor and to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities associated with transitory livelihood shocks, caused for example by ill health or economic crisis. Social protection is particularly important to cater to the needs of those who are chronically poor, and who cannot participate in and benefit from the opportunities created by growth due to circumstances beyond their control. This is necessary as it takes some time before the most vulnerable benefit from the impacts of any policy. Therefore, policies on social safety nets will not

only protect those who have to face shocks such as loss of job or ill health, but also protect the very poor from extreme deprivation.

The three policy pillarsexpansion of economic

opportunity, social inclusion to promote equal access

to opportunities, and social safety netssupported by good governance and strong institutions, can promote inclusive growth where all members of the society can benefit from and contribute to the growth process. Figure 1 depicts the three p

/ ------- ------ /

>

Inclusive Growth /

<<---------------------< /

High, efficient, and nets to High, efficient, and

Social inclusion to ensure equal access to --

Social safety netsto protect the chronically poor and to mitigate the risks of transitory livelihood shocks

. Investing in education, health, and other

sustained growth to

social services to expand human capacity

create productive jobs and economic opportunity

Eliminating market and institutional

failures and social exclusion to level the / / playing field /

<-------------------------------- Governance and Institutions----------------------------- Measuring Inclusive Growth: Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators Given the policy ingredients of inclusive growth as depicted in Figure 1, the questions that arise are: How should one measure inclusive growth? Are the economic opportunities equally accessible to all sections of the society? Are the public inputs and processes in building human capital and health equally accessible to all and geared to enhance human capacities, particularly the poor, rural populace, and women? Are there sufficient infrastructure endowments to enhance access to opportunities, markets, resources, information, and communications? Is governance responsive? All these considered, do current policies reduce inequalities in income and nonincome outcomes? Is progress being made and is progress becoming more inclusive? One approach to answer some of these questions is to identify indicators to measure not only the income and nonincome outcomes of inclusive growth, but also indicators of associated inputs, processes, and drivers (social inclusion,

social safety nets, and governance). These indicators will help evaluate the effectiveness of policies aimed at promoting inclusive growth. This special supplement to the Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 is a contribution to the ongoing research in ADB to operationalize inclusive growth, and proposes a framework of inclusive growth indicators (FIGI). The proposed FIGI aims to promote the use of statistics in developing inclusive growth policies and to encourage debate on the subject. In terms of scope, the proposed FIGI identifies indicators in a manner that distinguishes among different policy ingredients of inclusive growth depicted in Figure 1: (i) economic growth and employment opportunities, (

Pillar One
Growth and Expansion of Economic Opportunity Economic Growth and Employment 7 Growth rate of GDP per capita at PPP (constant 2005 PPP $) 8 Growth rate of average per capita income/consumption 2005 PPP $

(lowest quintile, highest quintile, and total) 9 Employment rate 10 Elasticity of total employment to total GDP (employment elasticities) 11 Number of own-account and contributing family workers per 100 wage and salaried workers Key Infrastructure Endowments 12 Per capita consumption of electricity 13 Percentage of paved roads 14 Number of cellular phone subscriptions per 100 people 15 Depositors with other deposito

Pillar Two Social Inclusion to Ensure Equal Access to Economic Opportunity

Access and Inputs to Education and Health 16 School life expectancy (primary to tertiary) 17 Pupil-teacher ratio (primary) 18 Diphtheria, tetanous toxoid, and

pertussis (DTP3) immunization coverage among 1-year-olds 19 Physicians, nurses, and midwives per 10,000 population 20 Government expenditure on education as percentage of total government expenditure 21 Government expenditure on health as a percentage of total government expenditure Access to Basic Infrastructure Utilities and Services 22 Percentage of population with access to electricity 23 Share of population using solid fuels for cooking 24 Percentage of population using improved drinking water sources 25 Percentage of population using improved sanitation facilities Gender Equality and Opportunity 26 Gender parity in primary, secondary, and tertiary education 27 Antenatal care coverage (at least one visit)

28 Gender parity in labor force participation 29 Percentage of seats held by women in national parliament

Pillar Three Social Safety Nets

30 Social protection and labor rating 31 Social security expenditure on health as a percentage of government expenditure on health 32 Government expenditure on social security and welfare as percentage of total government expenditure

Good Governance and Institutions 33 Voice and accountability 34 Government effectiveness 35 Corruption perceptions index

also part of MDG monitoring. Examples include outcome indicators on poverty, child deaths, and nutrition, and some access indicators for health, gender parity, and mobile phone access. As inclusive growth is economic growth with equality

of opportunity, the FIGI emphasizes growth and creation of opportunities along with social inclusion, social safety nets, and good governance, which are recognized as important policy ingredients to mitigate unequal opportunities. For example, indicators of inputs and access to education, health, infrastructure (including financial access and access to clean energy for electricity and cookingthe absence of which is often referred to as energy poverty), are included in FIGI, along with indicators of social safety nets and good governance. Some of the process indicators included in the FIGI, especially social safety nets and good governance, are not part of MDG monitoring. In that context, FIGI has a wider scope. About the Statistical Tables Using the proposed framework in Figure 2, a set of nine statistical tables with statistics on 35 indicators has been compiled for ADBs regional members in the subsequent sections.4 To the extent supported by available data, disaggregated statistics by area (rural or urban), wealth (top and bottom quintiles), and gender (female and male) have been presented. It may be noted that the sources of disaggregated statistics by wealth quintiles and by ruralurban are mainly household surveys such as the Demographic and Health Surveys and the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. In the absence of regular household surveys in most developing

economies in the region, these statistics are available only for a few economies. They are therefore, presented only for economies for which these could be accessed from publicly available databases maintained by international organizations such as the United Nations Childrens Fund, the World Health Organization, and other international organizations. Sources for the data are indicated at the end of each table.

The statistics in the tables for each indicator are usually presented for two data points between 1990 and 2010. These have often been referred to as earliest (usually a year between 1990 and 2000) and latest (usually a year between 2000 and 2010) year depending on the available data for different economies. The earliest and latest years for some indicators vary substantially across countries because indicators based on surveys are available for years only when the survey has been conducted. Each of the nine tables is also preceded by a brief write up on the indicators presented in the tables and some key trends based on data in the tables. The tables that are the sources for the charts presented show the actual years that the data relate to. In presenting the key trends, references have been sometimes made to five largest (or most populous) economies of the region. These refer to the economies of the Peoples Republic of China, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia,

and Pakistan.

Conclusion
The set of 35 indicators proposed are subject to experiment and research, and the indicators will be improved based on further research, additional inputs, and better data availability. Similar reports will be produced in the coming years with an improved set of indicators as needed. This publication aims to help strengthen the understanding of inclusive growth and the use of statistics in creating knowledge, as well as provide evidence for developing strategies and policies aimed at promoting inclusive growth. At the same time, this publication hopes to raise awareness of the need to collect timely and reliable disaggregated statistics on subpopulations and regions in a country, and to fill the data gaps to shed light on the inequalities in outcomes and in the equality of opportunities of an inclusive growth process.

Bibliography and References Ali, I., and J. Zhuang. 2007. Inclusive Growth toward a Prosperous Asia: Policy Implications. ERD Working Paper Series No. 97. Manila: Asian Development Bank. Asian Development Bank. 2011. Asia 2050: Realizing the

Asian Century. Manila: Asian Development Bank. Barro, Robert and Jong-Wha Lee, April 2010, A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950 2010, NBER Working Papers No. 15902. _____. 2008. Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank 2008 2020. Manila. Chaudhuri, S., and M. Ravallion. 2007. Partially Awakened Giants: Uncover Growth in China and India. In L. Alan Winters, and S. Yusuf, eds., Dancing With Giants: China, India, and the Global Economy. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Commission on Growth and Development. 2008. The Growth Report: Strategies for Sustained Growth and Inclusive Development. Washington, D.C.: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. McKinley, T. 2010. Inclusive Growth Criteria and Indicators: An Inclusive Growth Index for Diagnosis of Country Progress. ADB Sustainable Development Working Paper Series No. 14. Manila: Asian Development Bank. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2011. Compendium of OECD Well-Being Indicators. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/31/47917288.pdf United Nations. 2011. The Millennium Development Goals

Report 2011. http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/. _____. 2008. Official list of MDG indicators. http://mdgs. un.org/unsd/mdg/Host.aspx?Content=Indicators/ OfficialList.htm _____. 2000. United Nations Millennium Declaration. http:// www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.pdf Zhuang, J., ed. 2010. Poverty, Inequality, and Inclusive Growth in Asia: Measurement, Policy Issues, and Country Studies. Manila: Asian Development Bank. Zhuang, J., and R. Hasan. 2008. Inclusive Growth: Why It is Important. Development Asia. 2 (December). Manila: Asian Development Bank.

inclusive Growth under a Neo-liberal Policy Framework

these days, used widely in a large number of emerging and developing countries in the context of the neo-liberal policy framework, which is expected to deliver growth, and also inclusive growth. Empirical evidence from most of these countries however indicates that the neo-liberal policies have not been very successful in including the excluded in the mainstream development process. The paper observes that there is an urgent need to give a fresh look at the macroeconomic framework underlying the present policies. To start with, there is a need to end the tug of war between the growth and redistribution phases of neo-liberal policies. This is because the mainstream growth process that creates exclusion as well as inequalities tends to overpower the redistribution process and intensifies exclusions. The macroeconomic policies such as fiscal and monetary policies will have to play a much larger role in achieving developmental goals. There is also a need to expand the boundaries of macroeconomics to include natural resources as well as unpaid work within its purview to make it relevant and real.

http://www.epw.in/special-articles/inclusive-growth-under-neo-liberal-policy-framework.html

Government Effectiveness
A significant number of countries have negative or zero improvement indexes for both decades. Out of 40 economies, 19 improved in the 1990s while 21 did not. In the 2000s, 23 improved while 17 did not. Twenty-one accelerated in the improvements in the 2000s, 1 maintained its 1990s position, while 18 decelerated. Government effectiveness seems to be another weakness toward achieving good governance in developing Asia. Figure 1.10 shows the improvement indexes of government effectiveness. Most countries are in the

second, third, or fourth quadrant, indicating deterioration during the 1990s or the 2000s or bothonly 11 out of 40 economies improved on government effectiveness in both decades, which include 4 economies in Central and West Asia, 4 in East Asia, and 3 in Southeast Asia. Thus, economies of developing Asia need improved governance and transparent and accountable

The Inclusion of Rural Areas in the Growth Process

The improvement indexes of the indicators for access to improved drinking water sources and improved sanitation facilities disaggregated by rural and urban areas for which sufficient data are available for developing Asia have also been compared. For improved drinking water sources, out of 36 economies, 23 had larger improvement indexes for rural areas than for urban areas in the 1990s. This further increased to 25 in the 2000s, showing larger efforts to bridge the ruralurban divide in these countries. Figures 1.11.1 and 1.11.2 show the improvement indexes for access to improved drinking water sources for rural and urban areas. Access in rural areas to improved drinking water

sources accelerated in 32 economies in the 2000s compared with the 1990s, and in 21 economies in urban areas. For the sanitation indicator, out of 37 economies, 15 had larger improvement indexes for rural areas than for urban areas in the 1990s. This increased to 21 in the 2000s reflecting larger efforts to bridge the rural urban gap in sanitation in the 2000s. Figures 1.11.3 and

1.11.4 present the improvement indexes for access to improved sanitation facilities in the 1990s and 2000s for rural and urban respectively. Similar to drinking water, many economies exhibit accelerations in both rural and urban areas in the 2000s, though improvement indexes are much lower than the indexes for drinking water. Thus, while much more needs to be done to bridge the ruralurban gaps in accessing these essential basic services, it does indicate improvements in the rural areas vis--vis the urban areas in the last 2 decades. The inclusion of rural areas in development is critical for inclusive growth. Rural areas usually are more remote and often lack basic infrastructure, and where lower productivity (and therefore lower wage) employment tends to be concentrated. Improving infrastructure in the rural areas will promote growth with inclusion in developing Asia.

. Performance of Improvement Indexes in the 1990s and 2000s for Economies by Indicator: A Summary Table 1.4 summarizes the improvement indexes and accelerations for all economies in the selected indicators. Each cell of Table 1.4 is represented by an arrow depicting the direction of change of improvement indexes in the 2 decades, and if performance in the 2000s accelerated, decelerated or was maintained at the 1990s levels. The color of the arrow is green if the improvement indexes are positive in both decades, yellow if the improvement index is negative or zero in the 1990s but turns positive in the 2000s, orange if improvement index is positive in the 1990s but turns negative or zero in the 2000s and red if improvement index is negative or zero in both decades. The direction of arrow is upwards if there is acceleration in the improvement index in the 2000s, downward if there is a deceleration, and horizontal if the rate of progress in the 2000s is maintained at the 1990s level. Three major patterns quickly become evident. One is for East Asia and South Asia, where the number of indicators available is much more than the other

subregions. In general, poverty reduction, average years of schooling for adults, school life expectancy, under five mortality, infrastructure endowments, infrastructure in drinking water, and sanitary facilities in both rural and urban areas markedly improved and accelerated.

Conclusions
The main objective of this study has been to assess the improvements in the performance of developing Asia on 20 selected indicators of FIGI in the 1990s and 2000s and to see if the improvements in the 2000s accelerated over those in the 1990s. Improvement indexes using the Kakwani (1993) methodology were used to analyze the progress in the 2 decades, using indicators with sufficient data points for the analysis. Progress achieved in the 2 decades differs among economies and regions. While there is no country performing well in all indicators in both decades, more economies have achieved improvements than deteriorations in more indicators in both the 1990s and 2000s. Thirty economies had more indicators with positive indexes in the 2000s compared with the 1990s.

These included a number of economies which were classified as low income countries in 1990, most notable being Bangladesh, Bhutan, the PRC, India, Indonesia, the Lao PDR, the Maldives, Nepal and Timor-Leste. Azerbaijan; Georgia; Hong Kong, China; and Tuvalu, were the other countries with accelerations in at least three-fourths of indicators in the 2000s. Further, more indicators exhibited accelerations in the improvement indexes than decelerations in the 2000s, implying faster improvements for most indicators. Based on the above analysis of improvement indexes it can be concluded that developing Asia did far better during the 2000s on the selected indicators of policy pillars and outcomes of inclusive growth. Out of the four outcome indicators, consistently good performance has been achieved in poverty reduction, reduction in under-five mortality, and increasing average years of schooling. However, income inequalities as measured by the ratio of income or consumption share of highest quintile to lowest quintile suggest a worsening of the gap between the rich and the poor in many economies.

Among the indicators of policy pillar one improvements in per capita GDP growth rate, electricity

usage, and cellular phone subscriptions have been remarkable. There have been slow but positive changes in the reductions in own account and contributing family workers with an increasing share of salary and wage workers, but declining youth employment-to-population ratios can be cause of concern in some economies. Among the indicators of policy pillar two, significant gains have been made over the 2 decades in improving school life expectancy and most economies have been successful in bringing down pupilteacher ratios. Gender parity in primary education has improved significantly in the 2 decades, but gender parity in labor force participation has shown deterioration in many economies. DTP3 immunization for one-year old children also shows declines in many countries. Progress has been noteworthy in improving access to clean drinking water sources, including in rural areas; and in access to improved sanitation facilities though at a much slower pace than drinking water. The only indicator on social safety nets suggests some improvements in social security expenditures on health by governments. Good governance and sound institutions comes out to be weak in many economies as indicated by declines in the indicators of voice and accountability and government effectiveness.

Economic growth, poverty reduction, electricity usage, and school life expectancy appear t

and improvements in infrastructure of sanitation and drinking water, appear to have taken place irrespective of pace of economic growth. This was evident mostly in many Central and West Asian economies when these countries faced recession in the 1990s recovered in the 2000s. Countries that have successfully reduced poverty but have witnessed increasing income inequalitywill need to design policies to expand job opportunities and access to social services and infrastructure for regions and populations that are left behind to achieve inclusive growth. Further, for an economic growth that provides equality of opportunity to all, innovative policies and approaches will be needed. For example, cellular phones have immense benefits for low income groups and remotely located populations. Thus, programs that can empower poor and marginalized populations through use of mobile phone technology can be adopted. Women and youth constitute a large share of productive human resources. Falling youth

employment-to-population ratio and declining womens labor force participation are areas of concerns and require innovative employment policies to fully utilize the productive potential of women and youth to sustain economic growth, and reduce income inequality. To implement inclusive policies successfully and achieve their intended objectives, government effectiveness and institutions will have to be strengthened in most developing economies. Finally, significant efforts are needed to give high priority to improving availability of timely data on various indicators by important disaggregations to monitor progress on inclusive growth.

References
Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2008. Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank 2008-2020. Manila. ______2012a. Asian Development Outlook 2012: Confronting Rising Inequality in Asia. Manila. ______2012b. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2012. Manila. ______2012c. Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators: Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2012 Special Supplement. Manila.

______2011a. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011. Manila ______2011b. Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators: Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Special Supplement. Manila. Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko and Joshua Greenstein. 2010. How Should MDG Implementation Be Measured: Faster Progress or Meeting Targets? International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth Working Paper No. 63. Brazil: UNDP. Hailu, Degol and Raquel Tsukuda. 2011. Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: A Measure of Progress. International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth, Working Paper No. 78. Brazil: UNDP. International Labour Organization (ILO). 2012. International Labour Conference, 101st Session, 2012, Report V, The youth employment crisis: Time for action: Fifth item on the agenda. Geneva. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/ public/@ed_norm/@relconf/documents/ meetingdocument/wcms_175421.pdf Kakwani, N. 1993. Performance in Living Standards: An International Comparison. Journal of Development Economics. 41: 307336. Son, Hyun. 2013. Millennium Development Goal One:

How Asia Has Fared? Journal of Reviews on Global Economics (forthcoming). UNESCO 2004. Education for All Monitoring Report 2005: The Quality Imperative. UNESCO. Paris. Zhuang, J. and I. Ali. 2010. Poverty, Inequality, and Inclusive Growth in Asia. In J. Zhuang, ed. Poverty, Inequality, and Inclusive Growth: Measurement, Policy Issues, and Country Studies. London: Anthem Press and Manila: A